Content
@
0 reply
1 recast
1 reaction
orCarlos - Noun 976
@carlosjmelgar
Voting with rationale within the first few hours of a live prop should give you some sort of delegate flex. WDYT @peterpandam @toadyhawk.eth @ccarella.eth @nounishprof @noun40 @seneca @parkermccurley @jonruth ?
5 replies
0 recast
10 reactions
Nounish Prof ββ§-β§π©
@nounishprof
No β I think we put way too much emphasis on vwr. And the revote thing is so lackadaisical. If I think itβs important, Iβll write a whole blog post with my reasoning (and have) and may vote early as well. Sometimes itβs just not necessary. Voting already takes an extensive amount of time. Being expected to write an amazing reason every time is way too much to ask. If I think I have a unique perspective that will be valuable for others youβll see it. But I donβt think we need to celebrate it or reward it.
1 reply
0 recast
3 reactions
Michael Gingras (lilfrog)
@frog
We definitely should celebrate VWR, helping explain the nuances of a prop to inform voters is important. I read every VWR and appreciate those who spend the time explaining their thinking
1 reply
0 recast
2 reactions
Nounish Prof ββ§-β§π©
@nounishprof
I rarely read them unless it is a prop I need clarity on. I get most of my info from reading the prop itself, asking questions of the proposer, and the dicussion in Nouncil. My bigger point is if you incentivize vwr you will likely get less quality vwr not higher quality. Show me the incentive, I'll show you the outcome as they say.
2 replies
0 recast
1 reaction
orCarlos - Noun 976
@carlosjmelgar
I don't think it should should be compensated. Maybe reflected in the delegate score
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
